FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTY …

http://www.ijssit.com

© Wangui, Mbugua 129

FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTY DEVELOPMENT

FUNDED PROJECTS IN KENYA: A CASE OF KIAMBU COUNTY

1* Jane Wangui Kariithi

[email protected]

2** Dr. Doris Mbugua

1, 2 Department of business administration, School of Business

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology P.O Box 62000-00200 Nairobi, Kenya

Abstract

the The devolved system of governance was initiated with an objective of ensuring that government services

are brought closer to the citizen, and enhance development to the rural area and reduce congestion in the

major cities like Nairobi. Just like the central government, the county governments are tasked with the

responsibility of ensuring development on the designated area. However reports show that it has not been an

easy task for the last four years of devolution in Kenya. Various factors have been enumerated as key

determinant to successful implementation of devolved governance in Kenya. Therefore this study aimed at

finding the factors influencing implementation of County development funded projects in Kenya. Specifically

The study aimed at establishing how project funding and political factors affect implementation of projects.

The study adopted agency theory, project implementation theory and public value theory to build up the

literature. A survey research design was used in this study because is a very powerful form of quantitative

analysis that involves a careful and complete observation of a social unit irrespective of what type of unit is

under study. The target population of the research involved all the 12 sub counties in Kiambu County.

However, the researcher only targeted the project management, budgetary, finance and economic planning,

administration and public services and road transport and public works departments, as they are much

involved in the implementation of the development projects. The study used both the primary and secondary

data, where primary data was collected using self-administered questionnaires. Data collected was analyzed

using descriptive statistics to test correlation and regression of the study variables. In addition multiple

regressions was used to determine the effect of a set of independent variable on dependent variable. The study

finding reveled that project funding and political factors were among the key factors influencing strategy

implementation on development funded projects in Kiambu County. The study further revealed that all the

factors had a positive and statistically significant effect on the implementation of County development funded

projects. The study concluded that project funding, and political factors had a significant effect on

implementation of development projects in Kiambu County. Therefore the study recommends that counties in

Kenya should come up with better budgetary allocations for projects to ensure full implementation. The study

also recommend the inclusion of other factors that may affect the implementation of development projects such

as other rival politicians, public awareness and other macroeconomic factors, project planning, and training

of employees.

Keywords: Project funding, political factors, Project implementation

http://www.ijssit.com/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

International Journal of Social Sciences and Information Technology

ISSN 2412-0294

Vol IV Issue V, May 2018


1.1 Introduction

The Most of the developing countries in the world

have realized the importance of decentralization or

devolution in order to bring about development at

the local level. Decentralization as a means of

transforming the society aims at mobilization of

resources for Nation building. Nkanata (2012)

defines decentralization as the transfer of authority

on a geographical basis whether by decentralization

(delegation) of administrative authority to field

units of the same department or level of

government, or by political devolution of authority

to local government units or special statutory

bodies. Devolution is the transfer of power from a

central government to sub national (e.g., state,

regional, or local) authorities (Kubai, 2015).

Devolution usually occurs through conventional

statutes rather than through a change in a country’s

constitution; thus, unitary systems of government

that have devolved powers in this manner are still

considered unitary rather than federal systems,

because the powers of the sub national authorities

can be withdrawn by the central government at any

time (Kubai, 2015).

Devolution has been successful in other parts of the

world, US, India, Nigeria, Sweden, UK and South

Africa are some of the countries where devolution

has delivered the expected results in terms of

political stability and development. (Omari, Kaburi

& Sewe 2012). Uganda practices devolution

through kingdoms, Tanzania through ‘Jimbos’

while in Kenya the practices it in form of County

Governments. There is varying devolution system

in place for instance; US, Nigeria and India systems

are for federal states. Developing countries will

have to draw experiences from similar

environments and factors that bring them closer and

learn how they operates, benchmark their strengths

and transfer that knowledge and experience to

benefit the devolved government. Counties should

design and develop slogans to serve as a rallying

call or marketing edge (Okongo, 2015).

Devolution has been termed as key element to

development in the twentieth century. This has

been evidenced from the drastic changes which

have happened to those countries practicing it

globally. According to Burugu (2010), Los Angeles

County comprises of 88 cities within the state of

California. This country has succeeded through

federalism and has had various benefits which has

led to development of complex rail road’s in the

country that helped to open up areas as nurture

entrepreneurship development of the Hollywood

film industry, development of the reliable

electricity to power industries cities business and

homes and their country is a melt pot of diverse

cultures that pursue dreams and opportunities.

1.1.1 County Government in Kenya

Devolution was officially adopted in Kenya in 2010

with the passing of the new constitution through a

national referendum. The constitution created two

levels of government i.e. the National government,

the 47county governments and the senate as the

upper house. Even though Kenya still remains a

unitary state as it was, (Burugu 2010) asserts that

the two levels of governments have their well

outlined functions and powers. The national

government has three arms i.e. the Executive

headed by the president, the legislature and the

Judiciary. The county governments have the

Executive headed by the Governor and the

legislature or county assembly. Basically there are

47 counties in Kenya (see appendix III). The county

governments are led by County governors and their

deputies and county assembly members. They are

mandated to oversee the activities and development

projects in the counties as stipulated in the

constitution.

In the last four year of implementation of the

devolved government, various development

projects have been initiated in the local areas.

Urban centers have been developed into local cities

in the county Headquarters. The devolvement of

health services, roads constructions among other

services in the counties have geared to the


ISSN 2412-0294



progressive performance in Kenya (Odongo, 2014).

However, Kubai (2015) presumed that Devolution

being a new phenomenon in Kenya, the level of

preparedness of the counties to face up with the

identified challenges and potential complexities to

ensure that they are managed strategically is a

major concern. The county Governors have accused

the National government of being quick to devolve

functions without devolving the funds required to

execute them. Lack of funds has not only been the

reported challenge facing devolution in Kenya,

poor management, corruption, fraud and political

goodwill are other factors associated with deterred

growth in counties. Other forms of devolution

through other systems like CDF have faced

challenges, as executives don’t adhere to the

objectives and policy guidelines of its

establishment and utilization. They ignore priority

projects; appoint their friends, relatives and

henchmen to run it leading to theft, looting and

white elephant projects and fraud. The CDF Board

the government agency that administers the fund

says the issues concerning CDF include accidents

involving CDF vehicles, cases of suspected fraud,

unfair distribution of funds across constituencies,

contractors not being paid, incomplete projects,

mis-appropriation of funds and wrangles over

whom should sit on the local committees (Okongo,

2015).

Kamau and Muturi (2015), argue that quite a

number of factors are capable of influencing project

implementation if they are not handled with care.

These include inflation which has the effect of

increasing the project cost, bureaucracy in

government institutions, poor performance of

contractors (poor qualifications and skills) ,

increase or decrease in scope of the work, frequent

change of leadership, change in pre-contract

consultants, ineffective and inefficient project

finance structure, variations in designs and political

influence and lack of evaluation and monitoring of

the projects (Kamau & Muturi, 2015).

1.2 Statement of the problem

The devolved system of governance was initiated

with an objective of ensuring that government

services are brought closer to the citizen, and

enhance development to the rural areas and reduce

congestion the major cities like Nairobi. Just like

the central government, the county governments are

tasked with the responsibility of ensuring

development on the designated areas. These include

infrastructure development, ease access to services,

entrepreneurial and businesses development among

others. Since 2013 after the inauguration of

devolved system of governance, the county

governments have brought drastic changes in the

Country (Fredrick & Makori 2016). The county

governments have initiated many short term and

long term projects. However some of the projected

were successfully completed while others are not or

even abandoned. The audit report 2016 on County

and Constituency development projects reported

that about 60% of the projects initiated in the

previous year were not complete while others were

rendered inadequate. Among the causative factors

gearing to the incompleteness were conflicts of

interest, political factors, corruption and

mismanagement of funds.

As the demand for provision of social amenities

increases at the County level as well as jurisdiction

of their duties, many counties Kiambu included are

faced with challenges in implementing some of

their projects, due to some factors emanating either

internally or externally. The main purpose of

launching and developing these projects is to

provide essential services to the citizens such as

health care clean and conducive environment for

business and good road networks within the county.

When these projects are not implemented or they

are left incomplete, they end up not solving any

problem in the region, further they can be termed as

a waste of public funds for no utility is derived from

them. The problem of incomplete projects in the

county can be witnessed on the several construction

works which have not commenced since the tenders


ISSN 2412-0294



were awarded while others are on progress for the

last two years. For other projects the contractors

and stakeholders have withdrawn citing many

reasons to blame the county officials.

Various researches have been conducted in an

attempt to provide a solution in the management of

public funds and implementation of projects.

However, due to technology and innovation the

problem still remains steady. Kirungu (2011) in a

study on factors influencing implementation of

Donor Funded projects, observed that the Financial

and Legal Sector Technical Assistance Project

(FLSTAP) under the ministry of Finance (The

Treasury) has faced challenges to do with

implementation and therefore not able to achieve its

goals within the stipulated timeframes. Wanjala

(2016), Kogi (2013), and Jillo (2016) conducted

similar studies on factors influencing

implementation of projects in the constituencies.

However they focused on specific projects hence

rendering no solution to the county projects at large.

The effect of project implementation can be felt in

majority of the Counties with a lot of criticism to

the County governors as other are facing charges of

the same in court of law. This paves way that the

problem of project implementation is yet to be

solved and much has to be researched on this matter

and give a solutions and recommendations thereon.

This forms the basis of this research sought to find

out the factor influencing implementation of county

development funded projects in Kenya, a case of

Kiambu County.

1.3 General objective

This study sought to find out the factors influencing

implementation of county development funded

projects in Kiambu County.

1.3.1 Specific Objectives

i. To establish the influence of project

funding on the implementation of

County development funded projects in

Kiambu County.

ii. To establish the influence of political

factors on the implementation of County

development funded projects in Kiambu

County.

1.4 Scope of the study

This study sought find out the factor influencing

implementation of county development funded

projects in Kiambu County. The study covered four

variables which may be considered as the major

factors; project funding and political factors. The

study was conducted to selected departments in the

County that are involved in the projects

development. The study was carried out within a

period of four months.

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.2 Theoretical literature

2.2.1 Agency Theory

Agency theory defines and describes the

relationship between one person (the principal) and

another (the agent) where the latter is required to

perform services on behalf of the former (Jensen &

Meckling 1976). According to the theory, there is a

contractual relationship between the two parties.

Usually, the principal would be required to pay the

agent for his services. Agency theory addresses the

relationship where in a contract ‘one or more

persons (the principal(s) engage another person (the

agent) to perform some service on their behalf

which involves delegating some decision making

authority to the agent’ (Jensen & Meckling 1976).

This happens due to separation of ownership and

control, when the owners of the company or the

board of directors (the ‘principals’) have to engage

managers and other employees (‘agents’) to run the

business and need to monitor their performance to

ensure they act in the owner’s interest.

According to Economists Alchian and

Demsetzwere (1972) the first to argue that

monitoring the performance of individual work

output is always a cost of any firm and that the

organization is inefficient when the flow of


ISSN 2412-0294



information on individual performance is

minimized. This can easily happen if there are large

teams who act autonomously (Alchian, 2012). The

main concern of agency theory as proposed by

Jensen & Meckling (1976) is how to draft contracts

in which the agent’s performance can be

determined so as to act with the principal’s interests

in mind. This theory is designed for this study to

address the agency between the county government

and the National government. Where counties are

expected to deliver on behave of the national

government.

2.2.2 Theory of Project Implementation

According to Nutt (1996) implementation is a

process or a series of steps taken by responsible

organizational agents to plan change process in

order to elicit compliance needed to install changes.

Project managers employ the theory of project

implementation to make predetermined changes in

organizations by creating environments in which

the changes can thrive (Kamau & Muturi, 2015). In

line with this theory, Pinto (1989) argue that it is a

difficult and complex exercise to implement a

project successfully. Project schedule plan is the

other factor highlighted in the project

implementation theory. It involves providing a road

plan or strategy of how to achieve the desired

objectives in the project. Pinto (1989) has drawn

parallels between the different stages of project

implementation. The client’s consultant (usually

the project manager) is involved in formulating the

project schedule plan. However the consultant must

engage the client in formulating the plan. Anyanwu

(2003) asserts that the degree to which the client is

involved in the planning process determines the

level of success experienced by the project. This

theory supports all the variables in this research as

a factor that influences implementation of the

projects in the County.

2.2.3 Public value theory

Public Value Theory was formulated by( Moore

,1995). The theory was aimed at providing

managers from the public sector with an improved

understanding of the opportunities and constraints

within which they function with the aim of

producing valuable outcomes which satisfy public

interests. According to this theory, a manager

should not only aim at policy implementation but

also adhere to institutional norms (Moore, 1995).

The ultimate goal should be improving the lives of

citizens. Unlike private entities which are

accountable to their owners and shareholders,

public organizations are accountable to members of

the public and their democratically elected

representatives (Awino & Marendi-getuno, 2014).

The study applied the Public Value Theory to gauge

the accountability of public institutions set up to act

on behalf of the public. CDF committees are

constituted to decide which projects will be

undertaken using public funds while also

monitoring and overseeing the progress of such

projects. These committees should act in the best

interest of the citizens.

2.3 Conceptual frame work

2.4 Empirical literature review

2.4.1 Project Funding

Implementation of a project entails four criteria

namely; the project’s scope being delivered on

schedule, it is delivered within budget and, once

delivered, it meets the quality expectations of the

donor and beneficiaries (Gyorkos, 2003, McCoy,

2005). For project managers to be truly successful


ISSN 2412-0294



they must concentrate on meeting all of those

criteria. The reality is that most project managers

spend most of their efforts on completing the

project on schedule. They spend most of their time

on managing and controlling the schedule and tend

to forget about adequate funding allocation for all

project activities.

Project level of funding is determined at the initial

stages of project planning and usually in parallel

with the development of the project schedule. The

steps associated with funds allocation or budgeting

for project activities are highly dependent on both

the estimated lengths of tasks and the resources

assigned to the project (Frankel & Gage, 2007).

Project budgeting therefore serves as a control

mechanism where actual costs can be compared

with and measured against the budget. The budget

is often a fairly set parameter in the execution of the

project. When a schedule begins to slip, cost is

proportionally affected. When project costs begin

to escalate, the project manager should revisit the

project plan to determine whether scope, budget, or

schedule needs adjusting.

Lack of timely disbursement of funds has greatly

contributed to the failure of most projects in

different counties. Several projects have remained

incomplete due to lack of enough funds (Kamau &

Muturi, 2015). Auditor’s general report (2015)

asserts that 70% of the counties in the country have

reported malpractices such as theft,

mismanagement, fraud and misappropriation of

funds intended for development projects to other

undeserving endeavors. Mburu and Muturi (2016)

revealed that failure in timely completion of the

projects was occasioned by challenges associated

with project funding. According to their study, all

elements of the project that were; fund allocation

process, budgetary and funds disbursement had

respondents at below 60% in agreement. Based on

these findings the study concluded that shortage of

funding constrained the timely completion of

county funded projects.

The most appropriate basis for determining the

level of funding for a project is the nature and scope

of the project. A key function of planning for

successful implementation of a project is to

estimate the costs, staffing, and other resources

needed for the project work (Frankel & Gage,

2007). Applying too few resources to any given

activity slows progress and applying too many can

cause crowding that reduces productivity and

wastes resources that could be used more efficiently

by other activities (Achieng, 2016). Therefore the

effective and efficient allocation of scarce

resources in project activities within phases is a

realistic management opportunity for improving

project schedule performance (Frankel & Gage,

2007).

2.4.2 Political factors

Political factors refer to issues at the National level

of government and Regional level including

inconsistency in policies, laws and regulation and

political instability. These factors contribute to an

environment of uncertainty on return of capital

investment. Political instability and lack of

awareness in the people stimulate abrupt change of

policies adversely affecting the successful

achievement of development project objectives

(Osuka, 2015). Murray (2011) asserts that political

leaders mostly have personal interests in the

manner in which the government funds are spent.

They seek to support their bids for election to

offices through the way they expend the funds.

Members of parliament should work for the benefit

of residents of the constituency. The choice of

projects should be for the benefit of majority of

majority of the constituents. The motive should be

to provide good services to the constituents who

elected them.

According to (Eyaa & Qian, 2010), the overall

performance of a project is a function of the

individual commitment of each participant in the

project. Studies by (Yoon & Suh, 2003) in a Korean

context, found a positive relationship between

individual Commitment and perceived service


ISSN 2412-0294



quality. This suggests that the quality of citizenship

services is a function of the energy and loyalty that

individual members devote to the project. The

inadequacy of an intrinsic drive to perform tasks

also causes project failures in terms of time

overruns/ failure to beat deadlines (Riketta, 2002).

Project managers face many challenges and

problems concerning leadership, for example,

leadership style, stress, uncertainty, motivation,

learning, and teamwork (Berg & Karlsen, 2007).

Political good will refers to the willingness of

political leadership, especially the local and

national leaders and communities to live in

harmony and cooperate in developing their

community and delivery of goods and services

(Mburu, 2015). Good governance means the

effective management of resources in a manner that

is open, transparent, accountable, equitable and

responsive to people needs (Eyong, 2009). It also

means that processes and institutions produce

results that meet the needs of society while making

the best use of resources at their disposal.

2.5 Research Gaps

Although much has been researched on the factors

affecting CDF projects’ implementation, less has

been researched regarding the factors identified by

the author. Previous studies have been done on fund

reliability and contractor competence while much

of what has been written on monitoring and

evaluation does not seem to provide a solution as to

how proper M & E should be carried out to enhance

project implementation success. No single study

has been conducted to find out the various factors

affecting implementation of county funded

projects. Despite the reported poor performance of

counties in Kenya, therefore this forms the research

gap and the basis for this study.

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A survey research design was used in this study

because is a very powerful form of quantitative

analysis that involves a careful and complete

observation of a social unit irrespective of what

type of unit is under study. The target population of

this research included all the 12 sub counties in

Kiambu County. They include; GatunduNorth,

GatunduSouth, Ruiru, Thika, Githunguri, Kiambu,

Limuru, Kikuyu, Kabete, Kiambaa, Juja and Lari.

Thikasub-county is the largest in size

while Githunguri is the smallest. However, the

researcher only target the; Finance and Economic

Planning, Administration and Public services and

Roads Transport and Public Works departments, as

they are the ones involved in the implementation of

the development projects.

According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) a

sample to be representative enough, it should be at

least 10% of the target population if the sample is

more than 1000; otherwise the percentage should be

higher. Since the target population for this study is

small the researcher employed census sampling. In

census sampling all elements are used as the sample

size. This technique is chosen because the

researcher wants to increase statistical accuracy and

provide adequate data for analyzing the various

categories (Kombo& Tromp, 2006). This study

employed both primary and secondary data.

Questionnaires were administered to the

respondents through drop and pick by the

researcher. Secondary data was collected from the

county strategic document for the period of five

years.

The Data collected was analyzed using descriptive

statistics and presented using statistical tools such

as mean as a measure of central tendency,

frequencies and percentages. The Regression

Model was used to estimate the relationship

between the dependent and independent variables.

Y= 𝛽0 + 𝛽1𝑋1 + 𝛽2𝑋2 + 𝜀

Where:

Y = Implementation of county development funded

projects in Kenya (Dependent variable)

𝛽0= Intercept term


ISSN 2412-0294



𝛽𝑖= Are the various coefficients of the independent

variables

𝑋1= Project Funding

𝑋2= political factors

𝑋4= 𝜀= error term

4.1 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND

DISCUSSION

4.1.1 Influence of Project Funding on

implementation of county funded projects

The study sought to examine the respondent’s level

of agreement or disagreement on the various

measures of project funding on implementation of

County funded projects. Table 4.1, presents the

relevant results which show that on a scale of 1 to 5

(where 1= strongly and strongly disagree=5),

(mean score 4.06), (mean score 4.19), (mean score

4.23) and mean score 4.23) in extension all the

variables had a standard deviation less than 1.96

which means that all the variables are normally

distributed around their means. This implies that

majority of the respondent were almost to the same

opinion on the various measures of project funding

on implementation of county funded projects in

Kiambu.

As to whether proper accountability of project fund

was conducted. Majority of the responded strongly

disagreed with the statement. The findings further

revealed that lack of proper accountability of

projects funds led to budget deficit causing delays

in project completion.

Further findings indicated that delays in

disbursement of county funds from the treasury

caused delay in the implementation of county

projects.

These findings are supported by John (2007) that

applying too few resources to any given activity

slows progress and applying too many can cause

crowding that reduces productivity and wastes

resources that could be used more efficiently by

other activities. Therefore the effective and

efficient allocation of scarce resources among

development phases and among activities within

phases is a realistic management opportunity for

improving project schedule performance.

4.1.2 Influence of political factors on

implementation of county funded projects



measures of political factors. Table 4.2, presents the

relevant results which show that on a scale of 1 to 5

(where 1= strongly and strongly disagree=5),


4.28) and mean score 4.90) in extension all the



distributed around their means. The findings on

this variable revealed that differences between rival

politicians affect project implantations. Majority of

the respondents moderately agreed with the

statement that lack of team work within the county

government officials delayed project

implementation. These findings are supported by

Hauschildt, Gesche, and Medcof (2000) that the

success of a project depended more on government

support, such as project leadership, top

management support, and project team, rather than

on technical factors. Leary-Joyce (2004) refers to

participative leadership as servant-leadership,

which incorporates the leader’s ability to include,

discuss, take ideas, look for ways to help people

come on board, and celebrate every success that

comes along.


ISSN 2412-0294



4.1.3 Implementation of County development

funded projects



measures of Implementation of county

development funded projects. Table 4.3, presents

the relevant results which show that on a scale of 1

to 5 ( where 1= strongly and strongly disagree=5),


4.37) and (mean score 4.31) in extension all the



distributed around their means. The finding

revelled that not all projects in the county are

completed on time. The findings further revealed

that some projects were within the budgets amount

while are had deficits figures which delayed the

completion. The findings also revealed that some of

the implemented projects were not of the desired

quality. These findings were in agreement with the

Auditors general report (2017) which clearly

indicated that some counties projects were not to

standard and were of poor quality.

Table 4.3 Implementation of County

development funded projects

4.2 Correlation Matrix

From Table 4.4 it can be observed that the

correlation between the independent variables and

the dependent variable was high. The interpretation

was that the level of multicollinearity between the

independent variable was not very high which

meant that the influence of each variable in the

regression model could be isolated easily.

According to Brook (2002) multicollinearity is the

problem that occurs when the explanatory variables

are very highly correlated with each other. Brook

note further that if there is no relationship between

the explanatory variables, they would be said to be

orthogonal to one another. If the explanatory

variables were orthogonal to none another, adding

or removing a variable from a regression equation

would not cause the values of the coefficients on the

other variables to change. Burns and Burns (2008),

assert that muticollinearity is the presence of very

high correlations between the independent

variables and should be avoided.

On the other hand however a very high correlation

between the independent and the dependent

variable is termed as good since it shows the

explanatory power of the individual independent

variable. From Table 4.4 it was noted that the

correlation between implementation of county

development projects and the various independent

variables was above 30%, which was a good

indicator of the explanatory power of the

independent variables on the variance of the


ISSN 2412-0294



dependent variable. However project funding had

the strongest influence of 0.833 on project

implementation. Political factors was the second

with 0.738 influence effect.

Table 4.4 Correlation Matrix

4.3 Regression Results

4.3.1 Project funding

From Table 4.5, the regression coefficient of

Project funding was found to be 0.340. This value

shows that holding other variables in the model

constant, an increase in Project funding by one unit

causes the implementation of development projects

to increase by 0.340 units. The value of the

coefficient is also positive. The positive effect

shows that there is a positive relationship between

Projects funding and implementation of

development projects in Kiambu County.

The coefficient was not just positive but also

statistically significant with a t-statistic value of

4.789. A t-statistic value of 1.96 and above is

normally accepted to be significant for inference

analysis. The standard error was found to be 0.071

and the p-value was found to be 0.000. The variable

was also found to be the most influential variable

on the implementation of development projects in

the County. These findings supports those of

(Kimenyi, 2005), (Kamau & Muturi, 2015).

Okungu (2008) and Mburu and Muturi (2016) who

found that Project funding had effect on

implementation of constituency development

projects.

4.8.4 Political factors

From Table 4.5, the regression coefficient of

political factors was found to be 0.285. This value

shows that holding other variables in the model

constant, an increase in politival factors by one unit

causes the implementation of development projects

in Kiambu County to decrease by 0.285 units. The

value of the coefficient is also positive. The positive

effect shows that there is a positive relationship

between political factors and implementation of

development projects in the County. The

coefficient was not just positive but also

statistically significant with a t-statistic value of

3.563. A t-statistic value of 1.96 and above is

normally accepted to be significant for inference

analysis. The standard error was found to be 0.080

and the p-value was found to be 0.000. The variable

was also found to be the least influential variable on

the implementation of development projects. These

findings are supported by those of Murray (2011),

(Shepherd 1994), (Kamau & Muturi, 2015),

(Keefer & Khemani, 2009), Pluinkett and Attner

(1996), Robbins and Coulter (2012) and Buchanan

and Huczynsk (2010) who found that leadership

had effect on implementation of development

projects in Kenya.

The fitted regression model is;

Y= β0 + β1X1 + β2X2 + ε

Y = 1.322 + 0.340 X1 + 0.285 X2 + ε

Standard Error 0.370 0.071 0.080

t-Statistics 3.573 4.789 3.563

p-value 0.000 0.000 0.000


ISSN 2412-0294



Where; Y = Implementation of county development

projects, X1 = Project Funding, X2 = Political

factors ε = Error Term, β0 = Intercept, β1, β2, =

Coefficients.

5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

From the study findings all the measurers of project

funding were found to have effect on the

implementation of County funded development

projects as depicted by the various responses from

the respondents that were presented using table

where the response was also presented in mean and

standard deviation as measurers of central tendency

form. The constructs were found to be of good

reliability that allowed the researcher to proceed to

the actual data collection, quantitative and

inferential analysis. This variable was found to

have a positive effect of 0.340 on the

implementation of development projects in Kiambu

County. This meant that increase in project funding

by 0.340 facilitated the increase in implementation

of County development projects by 34%.

From the study findings all the measurers of

political factors were found to have effect on the


County as depicted by the various responses from

the respondents that were presented using table

where the response was also presented in mean and

standard deviation as measurers of central tendency

form. The constructs were found to be of good

reliability that allowed the researcher to proceed to

the actual data collection, quantitative and

inferential analysis. This variable was found to

have a positive effect of 0.285 on the


County. This meant that increase in politics

facilitated the increase in implementation of

development projects by 28.5%. The factor scores

obtained from the data reduction process were used

in regression analysis as variables. The findings

therefore showed that for the implementation of

development projects in the county is highly

dependent on political influence.

From the study findings, all the measurers of

project implementation, that is whether the projects

met the set deadlines, budgets provision, technical

requirement and quality standards were found to be

significant as depicted by the various responses

from the respondents that were presented using

tables where the response was also presented in

mean and standard deviation as measurers of

central tendency form. The constructs were found

to be of good reliability that allowed the researcher

to proceed to the actual data collection, quantitative

and inferential analysis. The findings therefore

showed that they are factors which influence

implementation of projects.

5.2 Conclusions

The study concluded that project funding had a

significant effect on the implementation of

development projects in Kiambu County. The

findings that project funding had a positive effect

on implementation of development projects, was a

good indication that increase in project funding of

development projects motivate better

implementation of development projects in the

country. The influence of this variable was found to

have a positive and a statistically significant effect

on projects. This variable was the most influential

variable on the development of projects. This

implies funds are very critical to successful projects

implementations in the counties

The study further concluded that political factors

had a significant effect on the implementation of

county projects. The findings that political factors

had a positive effect on implementation of

development projects in the county, was an

indications that increase in politics involving

development projects would either motivate better

implementation of development projects in the

country. The influence of this variable was found to

have a positive and a statistically significant effect


ISSN 2412-0294



on projects. This variable was the second most

influential variable on the development of projects.

5.4 Recommendations

Since this variable was found to be a key

determinant of implementation of county

development projects, the leaders and management

team of these projects should keep a keen eye on

enhancing the project funding criteria. The counties

are advised to come up with good budget control to

funds are always available for implementation of

their proposed projects. Counties are advised to

allocate enough funds for completion of proposed

project as this would ensure no projects are left

incomplete due to lack of funding.

The counties leaders and projects managers are

advice to keep off destructive politic in the projects

as they act as an obstacle to the growth and

implementation of projects in the Counties. The

managers of these projects should keep a keen eye

on improving tackling political issues that may

hinder the progress of the projects.

The study further recommends research should be

directed towards identifying more variables that

affect the implementation development projects in

counties for example, macroeconomic factors,

project planning, training of employees. From the

regression model it was noted that the variables

included were only able to explain 84 % of the

variation in the implementation of county

development funded projects. This study therefore

recommends the improvement of this model by

including more variables that are relevant in

explaining the variation some of which have been

mentioned above. The study also recommend the

research to be carried out in other counties to test

whether they experience similar challenges in

implementation of projects.

REFERENCES

Berg, M. E., & Karlsen, J. T. (2007). Mental models

in project management coaching.

Engineering Management Journal,

19(3), 3-14.

Buchanan, D.A and Huczynsk, A.A (2010),

Organizational behavior. Seventh Edition

Prentice Hall International. Publishers.UK

Congress 2008 Proceedings. (R. Akiri, Ed.) Project

Management Institute (PMI).

Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2008). Business

research methods.10th(edt.). McGraw-Hill

publishers. Singapore

Eyong, O. T. (2009). Promoting Good Governance

in the Management of NGOs.

Kamau, G., & Muturi, M. (2015). Factors affecting

Successful Completion of Constituency

Development Funded projects in

Kenya: A Case Study Nyandarua County,

III (5), 499–516

Marion, K. (2016). Factors influencing

implementation of constituency

development funded projects in Kenya: a

survey of Juja constituency. International

journal of science and research

Mburu, S.N. and Muturi,W. (2016). Factors

affecting timely completion of constituency

development fund financed projects: A case

of water supply projects in Kinangop

constituency, Kenya. International journal

of social science and information

technology. Vol 2 issue 3, pp 2412-0294

Moore, M.H (1995). Creating Public Value.

Strategic Management in Government.

Havard University Press

Mugenda, O. &. (2003). Research methods.

Nairobi: Laba Graphics Service.

Murray, C. (2011). Constituency development

funds: Are they constitutional?

International Budget Partnership, 4(12).


ISSN 2412-0294



Nutt, P.C(1996) “Tactics of implementation

approaches for planning” Academy of

Management Journal, vol. 8

Okungu, J. (2008). The beauty and shame of

Kenya’s Constituency Development Fund.

Pinto, J.K (1989) “Variations in critical success

factors over the stages in the project life

cycle” Journal of Management, Vol 14,

No.1

Pluinkett, W.R. and Attner, R.F. (1996).

Management: Meeting and Exceeding

customer expectations Sixth edition

South-western college publishing. USA

Robbins, S. P. and Couiters, M. (2012).

Management Eleventh edition Pearson

Publishers. USA.

World bank & IMF. (2006). Global monitoring

report; MDG strengthening mutual

accountability, aid, trade and

governance. Washington DC.

FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTY …

Documents

Transcript of FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTY …